A Criticism of the International Phonetic Alphabet
Written / Typed by: Mister Özgün Öztekin (SalviaSage)
Date of Last Revision: 2022-07-21
Word count: ∓19,200 words
Chapter Count: 15 chapters
This is the original document.
Typed in British English spelling as a Markdown document (.md) and it is an untranslated copy.
Hosted online at the following URL:
https://gist.github.com/SalviaSage/a08f5d6d8761f38df8e61470a679d4eb
Ontario, Canada, 21ˢᵗ Century, Unpublished.
Relevant Links and Other Works by Mister Özgün Öztekin (SalviaSage):
A Guide on Making Phonetic Transcriptions and the Translingual Phonetic Alphabet: https://gist.github.com/SalviaSage/a08f5d6d8761f38df8e61470a679d4eb
The Monologue on the Phonology of the English Language and a Critique: https://gist.github.com/SalviaSage/5cd6cea8f7084349a998f85f4bc69334
Credits:
https://wikipedia.org
http://graphemica.com
https://home.unicode.org/
http://gists.github.com
https://canipa.net/doku.php
https://www.internationalphoneticassociation.org/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Phonetic_Alphabet
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uralic_Phonetic_Alphabet
This document is subject to change.
[TOC]
Articulatory phonetics is the scientific subject which explains how different sounds are pronounced by humans. It deals with the explanations of these sounds and their categorisations. It explains how these sounds are produced, where they are produced and other related subjects.
In this scientific document; I try to explain everything I learned and discovered regarding this subject matter using a logical method that doesnʼt invalidate itself. Some of the writings here are my own unique findings and reports and they may not necessarily be found in other literature. Furthermore, some of the content here is in contrast with the explanations given by other sources.
I must say that the literature on the subject of articulatory phonetics is quite extensive. On websites such as Wikipedia.org, much information on the subject can be found. I have learned a lot from this website myself. However, sadly, certain things with regards to this scientific subject are missing in literature or that they are wrong, and if it isn’t necessarily wrong, it just fails to be precise. This became more apparent to me as I continued my studies into phonetics. After I had progressed in my studies, I started to see mistakes with the International Phonetic Alphabet and I decided to develop a Unicode phonetic alphabet of my own. I named that project “The Translingual Phonetic Alphabet”. I also wrote the document, “Independent Explanations on Articulatory Phonetics; a Criticism of the International Phonetic Alphabet” as well as another work titled “A Guide on Making Phonetic Transcriptions and the Translingual Phonetic Alphabet”.
As the title of this work makes it apparent, it is supposed to be an independent scientific document which sheds light on a scientific subject. I don’t necessarily have to accept the arguments and the explanations given in other sources and instead, I have done my own research and I try to explain this subject matter myself. I aim for this document to be the authoritative scientific work on the subject of articulatory phonetics. It aims to document everything with regards to this subject extensively. It uses extensive English vocabulary to make explanations as well as some words that I coined to achieve this goal. In keeping up with the scientific tradition, the words are derived mainly from Greek and Latin words and they are all already existing words. I felt the need to create and use new descriptive words in order to make accurate and full explanations. However, I define these words to try to eliminate confusion. I consider this work to be my greatest scientific literary work and it is also the longest one by word count. I also aim to translate this work into different written languages if I have the time to do so, but that task can be taken up by others as well. I do have the tools and the capacity to make my own translations.
This document gives examples from the IPA (International Phonetic Alphabet) phonetic notation marked with square brackets [ ]. The TPA (Translingual Phonetic Alphabet) phonetic notation is marked with curly brackets { }.
The Translingual Phonetic Alphabet is based on the International Phonetic Alphabet. It can be considered a derivative of it. The IPA has full Unicode support and it is still being supported, that is, more phonetic characters in conformity with the IPA are being added into Unicode. I do not have the rights to Unicode or the International Phonetic Alphabet. I believe there is nothing here with regards to my own works that I can patent or claim that I invented. The rights of those works for which I respect, belong to their respective authors. However, my literary works as well as my science project, the Translingual Phonetic Alphabet constitute my own (author’s) intellectual property and I want my intellectual property preserved and attributed to me.
I must underline the complexity of this subject. In order to have accurate explanations, we really have to dig deep. I want to give you a sense of how many different combinations of sounds there can be. Through my research, I have found and numbered the total number of individual sounds or phones to be at about 220. All of which can be represented in the Translingual Phonetic Alphabet and in Unicode. There are enough Latin letters and their variations in Unicode to make an alphabet based on that and I did exactly that. There are about 200 consonants (contoids) depending on the most inclusive ways of counting, including the implosives as a separate category than the plosives, the ejectives as separate from non-ejectives and others. There are about 20 vowels (vocoids) plus the 4 “semi-vowels”, which can also be counted as consonants (contoids) due to their level of restriction. There also exists “secondary articulations” whereby another motion is being committed within the vocal tract by another organ while an articulation is taking place at the same time. Seeing this forced me to introduce the concept of “plain phones” and “complex phones”. “Phone” here, being the Greek word for “sound”. This complexity arises from the human being’s excellent capacity for language and sound production. However, we do know that there are limitations to these “mix and matches” and that not everything can be combined with one another. It is the subject of articulatory phonetics to make correct explanations with regards to these sounds.
In comparison to my 20 vowels, the International Phonetic Alphabet has over 30 vowels. The website wikipedia.org lists it as having 33 vowels. I believe that is too many, not demonstrated, not factual and superfluous. I also believe that their vowels are quite wrong and I give good criticism of that vowel system in this work considering I had to put a lot of effort into trying to create a new factual vowel chart and did so successfully. The consonants of the IPA are quite good and factual. However, they have less consonants than the TPA. This stems from the fact that they did not count or take into account all of the possible consonant sounds that can be articulated in the vocal tract while I did and found some that they missed. I tried to identify every single sound that can be pronounced and I believe I did so. I also believe I created a very factual universal phonetic system that works with all languages, while it does not take accents into account. I believe that accents have no place in a universal phonetic notation system and I try to demonstrate why in this work.
In order to understand articulatory phonetics, we need to understand and study the human anatomy to some extent. The parts of the body that we are concerned with are located in the head and in the throat (Lat. guttur). Collectively, we call the parts of the body where speech is realised “the vocal tract” (Lat. tractus vocalis).
The vocal tract starts at the glottis. The glottis is an organ located within the throat. It is a ‘V’ shaped opening that we have control over and it plays a very important role in speech. The entirety of the areas located above the glottis constitute the vocal tract. These include the epiglottis, the tongue (Lat. lingua), the uvula, the hard palate (Lat. palatum), the soft palate (Lat. velum), the alveolar ridge, the teeth (Lat. dentes), the oral tract (Lat. tractus oralis), the lips (Lat. labia) and furthermore, the nasal tract (Lat. tractus nasalis). It is a mistake to exclude the nasal cavity from the vocal tract. The nasal cavity is in fact a part of the vocal tract, even if the external nose is not a part of it. The nasal cavity is connected to the oral cavity at the back of the mouth at the soft palate, not at the uvula. The uvula looks like a small tongue that hangs down from the soft palate. The first place of articulation is the glottis and the last, most upper place of articulation is the nasal cavity. There are about twenty-one places of articulations. The epiglottis is a flap which is located above the glottal opening and it has an important role in swallowing. It acts like a slide during the function of swallowing and closes the glottal opening and prevents choking. The esophageal opening is located just under the glottis (behind the glottis). It can be difficult to see in photographs because it is normally closed and hidden off. During swallowing, the epiglottis basically covers the glottis to prevent choking and the food (called “bolus” in this context) slides into the esophagus.
The esophagus is behind the trachea and goes down to the stomach. The windpipe (Lat. trachea) is larger and wider in comparison to the esophagus and is located in front of the esophagus in the throat. It goes down towards the lungs (Lat. pulmones) and eventually forks into two pathways. One goes to the left lung (Lat. pulmonis sinister) and the other goes to the right lung (Lat. pulmonis dexter).
The palate has to be correctly separated into two parts as the hard palate (Lat. palatum) and the soft palate (Lat. velum). This is because in the anterior part of the palate, there is some kind of a bony structure right above it while that isn’t the case for the posterior soft palate, which arcs downwards and is mobile. It can be moved up and down and is done so during speech and it plays an important role in the pronunciation of certain consonants and sounds.
The lungs, the diaphragm and the trachea also have secondary involvement. Although clearly, their primary function is breathing, they have to be put into the picture in order to make explanation of “pulmonic sounds”. Furthermore, the jaw (Lat. maxilla) also plays a secondary role and needs to be put into the picture in order to define vowels accurately. I insist that the first place of articulation is the glottis, going upwards and gradually ending with the lips and the nasal cavity. It is a mistake to start ordering these sounds starting from the lips and going down.
We have amazing muscular control over the organs located in the vocal tract. Many of these organs are mobile and we control them. Using them, we can direct the airflow in different directions such as out of the mouth or out of the nose. We can hold our breath (close the glottal opening) and utilise different ways to pronounce sounds. There are different “mechanisms of productions” for sounds as well as different “places of articulations” and “manners of articulations”. I believe I have defined these crucial concepts very well in this document and I have written of them.
Some important information can be obtained from photographs of the glottis in its open and closed states. However, they are excluded from this document.
The default position of the glottis is typically the position of the glottis during breathing and the pronunciation of voiceless consonants. The vocal cords are spread apart and there is a wide opening between them. The vocal cords do not vibrate. The air freely passes inwards and outwards. In comparison, during speaking or singing, the vocal cords are being brought together and are being caused to vibrate and contract as well as relax successively. This all happens very fast and human beings have amazing control over the organs located here. I believe the frequencies with which these vocal cords vibrate was even measured in hertz but I don’t know what it is and I am excluding that from this document.
Also of importance is the “complete glottal closure”. The white/gray vocal cords can be brought together in full in order to block off the airway fully. This is what happens in the body physically when a person holds their breath. We have the ability to close off the air coming in and out of the lungs at the glottis. This motion in is in fact utilised in the pronunciation of “ejective consonants” and “implosive consonants”. These two categories of consonants are a series of consonants whereby the complete closure of the glottis is necessary in order to pronounce them. While the “ejective consonants” can only be voiceless consonants, the “implosive consonants” can be voiced or voiceless consonants. More on this particular subject later.
The glottis being the first place of articulation, there are at least twenty different places of articulations moving upwards. Currently, I define twenty-one places of articulation in the TPA and I have demonstrable evidence for all of these. However, I believe there may still be one or two more than what I managed to discover. We need to have this many places of articulations in order to make accurate explanations of speech sounds. World languages back up this claim as for example; in the Arabic language, aside from having consonants that are articulated at the glottis, there are also consonants that are articulated at the location of the epiglottis. There are also consonants that are articulated at the uvula further above as well as consonants that are articulated at the velum (soft palate). They are all distinct from one another and have separate letters for them in the Arabic alphabet. For example, the word for “dog” is pronounced with a consonant at the velum (kalb) while the word for “heart” is pronounced with a consonant at the uvula (qalb). There is no difference between the way they are pronounced except for this slight difference in the places of articulation and this language makes distinctions between various different sounds that are pronounced in the throat.
I believe I have to touch up on a very important matter here. In the above example we saw how two different places of articulations can change the meaning of a word. But under some circumstances, having a slightly different place of articulation or a pronunciation will not change the meaning of a word. This is what constitutes the difference between a “phone” and a “phoneme”. For example, in the Turkish language there exists the palatal plosive and the velar plosive. Both of them are employed in pronunciation even if there may not be separate letters for them in its writing and even if its speakers may not be aware of it. This distinction however is “phonetic” and not “phonemic”, as substituting the palatal for the velar and vice verse will never give us another word. The study of these sounds as it pertains to languages is not “phonetics” but instead, it is another topic called “phonology”.
In order to make accurate explanations of articulatory phonetics, we need to have about six main categories of places of articulations and at least twenty sub-categories. I reject any number below twenty. Each category names specific parts of the anatomy of the vocal tract. Basically, the word “place of articulation” refers to the exact spot where the sound is articulated. Below is a complete list of these places of articulations compiled by myself.
Pharyngeal (articulated at the pharynx just below the tongue)
Lingual (articulated with the tongue)
Dental (articulated with the teeth)
Labiodental (articulated with the teeth and the lips)
Labial (articulated with the lips)
Nasal (articulated at the nose / nasal cavity)
Pharyngeal divides into two groups called “epiglottal” (articulated at the epiglottis) and “glottal” (articulated at the glottis).
Lingual is accurately divided into five sub-categories. Because the tongue is so versatile and flexible, it needs to be defined further. These divisions are the radix (the root of the tongue), dorsum (the back of the tongue), the lamina (the blade of the tongue, which is the main top part of the tongue), the apex (the tip of the tongue) and the apex-subapex which includes the tip of the tongue as well as the underside of the tip of the tongue. The adjectival words for these words are defined as follows: radical, dorsal, laminal, apical and apical-subapical. These parts of the tongue are then placed on the palate at the roof of the mouth or at various other positions all throughout the mouth. That gives us about fourteen different places of articulations and combinations that the tongue can utilise, out of the twenty that we already identified, making it the hotbed of human speech sounds. Perhaps this is why the word “language” is the same word as the word “tongue” in many languages.
The tongue can be placed on the following positions:
UVULA: (UVULAR)
SOFT PALATE / VELUM: (VELAR)
HARD PALATE / PALATUM: (PALATAL)
ALVEOLAR RIDGE: (LAMINO-ALVEOLAR)
UPPER ALVEOLAR RIDGE: (APICO-UPPER-ALVEOLAR)
LOWER ALVEOLAR RIDGE: (APICO-LOWER-ALVEOLAR)
UPPER TEETH: (SUPRADENTAL)
UPPER & LOWER TEETH: (INTERDENTAL)
UPPER LIP: (SUPRALABIAL)
UPPER & LOWER LIP: (LINGUOLABIAL)
LOWER LIP: (SUBLABIAL)
ALVEOLAR RIDGE and MOUTH FLOOR: (ALVEOLO-SUBLINGUAL)
UPPER LIP and MOUTH FLOOR: (SUPRALABIO-SUBLINGUAL)
The complete list of the places of articulations:
GLOTTIS: (GLOTTAL)
EPIGLOTTIS: (EPIGLOTTAL)
UVULA: (UVULAR)
SOFT PALATE / VELUM: (VELAR)
HARD PALATE / PALATUM: (PALATAL)
§ ALVEOLAR RIDGE: (LAMINO-ALVEOLAR) (IPA: POST-ALVEOLAR)
§ UPPER-ALVEOLAR RIDGE: (APICO-UPPER-ALVEOLAR), (IPA: RETROFLEX)
§ LOWER-ALVEOLAR RIDGE: (APICO-LOWER-ALVEOLAR), (IPA: ALVEOLAR)
UPPER TEETH: (SUPRADENTAL) (IPA: DENTAL)
UPPER and LOWER TEETH: (INTERDENTAL)
UPPER LIP: (SUPRALABIAL)
UPPER LIP and LOWER LIP: (LINGUOLABIAL)
LOWER LIP: (SUBLABIAL)
ALVEOLAR RIDGE and MOUTH FLOOR: (ALVEOLO-SUBLINGUAL)
UPPER TEETH and LOWER TEETH: (BIDENTAL)
UPPER LIP and LOWER TEETH: (SUPRALABIODENTAL) (IPA: DENTOLABIAL)
LOWER LIP and UPPER TEETH: (SUBLABIODENTAL) (IPA: LABIODENTAL)
UPPER LIP and LOWER LIP: (BILABIAL)
NASAL CAVITY: (VELO-NASAL)
§ The alveolar ridge should be divided into three separate categories as such to make accurate explanations.
These positions would then be mixed with the manner of articulations as well as its glottal voicing state to give us specific consonants such as “voiceless alveolar fricative” or “voiced alveolar plosive” and so on. This kind of terminology is not at all my own, I learned it from other sources. However, the above listed places of articulations were all independently identified and confirmed by me.
Although all of these places of articulations do exist, some of them are not used in languages such as the upper lip and lower teeth. While its opposite, the lower lip and the upper teeth are used in many languages. I think this is because that pronunciation just comes so much more natural even though the other way around is just as easy to pronounce. Try saying ‘ffff’ but by placing your upper lip on your lower teeth instead.
These places of articulations are then combined with manners of articulations to give us separate sounds. I have identified about sixteen such manners of articulations. Each one has a specific definition and is evidenced in world languages and correlates with the mechanisms of sound production of which, there are four.
Okay, so let’s recap. About twenty or twenty-one different places of articulations. About sixteen different manners of articulations depending on how you count it and four mechanisms of sound productions. I must note that the term “mechanism of sound production” or “manner of production” is being used by myself in this document. I believe it is a necessary concept that compliments the places of articulations and the manners of articulations that other literature already talk of.
Through my research I have identified four manners of productions. This is a different, important category that has to be discussed in articulatory phonetics, it is different than the place of articulations and the manners of articulations that is talked of. It deals with the mechanisms that are responsible for sound production in the vocal tract. I have identified four such mechanisms. The first three mechanisms be egressive or ingressive. Egressive meaning it is an outward motion while ingressive is an inward motion.
All sounds have to be classified within these four mechanisms:
Pulmonic mechanism
Glottalic mechanism
Lingual mechanism
Percussive mechanism
The pulmonic, glottalic and lingual mechanisms can work in both directions while the percussive does not. The percussive does not have an egressive or an ingressive direction, as its direction is both of the articulators towards one another. So it is neither inward nor outward.
That gives us four mechanisms, with the first three branching into two, it gives us seven mechanisms in total and this is what all sounds have to work with.
Egressive Pulmonic versus Ingressive Pulmonic
Egressive Glottalic versus Ingressive Glottalic
Egressive Lingual versus Ingressive Lingual
Percussive
Here is the list again with their common names as they are defined in other literature as well:
Egressive Pulmonics (pulmonics) versus Ingressive Pulmonics (ingressives)
**Egressive Glottalics **(ejectives) versus Ingressive Glottalics (implosives)
Egressive Linguals (velarics) versus Ingressive Linguals (clicks)
Percussives (percussives)
I must thank Wikipedia.org as their webpages regarding this particular concept is excellent and near complete. There are few differences here between my explanations and theirs and I am largely copying their content and I have devised this system out of the information found on their webpages.
The word “pulmonic” means the glottis is open and the air simply exits out of the lungs. While “glottalic” means the glottis is closed (breath is held) during the pronunciation of the sound. In the case of the “glottalic”, it is the glottis that is responsible for pushing the air out, or rather pistoning it out in some way as it is the case with ejective consonants or sucking itself in as it is the case with implosive consonants. I myself could not pronounce the glottalic consonants and I did not understand how they worked. However, after some time and after some persistence and investigation, I learned to pronounce them myself and I can now pronounce them easily and understand what happens during their pronunciations.
Therefore, there is no pulmonic involvement with the lingual, glottalic and percussive sounds. In percussive, the two articulators hit one another to create a sound. Try hitting your upper teeth to your lower teeth by bringing your jaw down and up, a bidental percussive, or by hitting your lips together up and down, a bilabial percussive. You may think that this is trivial, but it still needs to be included in order to have a full explanation.
Typically, most languages do not have the glottalic consonants because it is an extra step to pronunciation as it involves having to close the glottis. I do know that the Vietnamese language has the letters ‘Đ , đ’. They are basically the letters ‘D’ with a bar going through it. The letter ‘D’ that we are already familiar with is also there but this new letter is basically a ‘D’ pronounced with a closed glottis, an implosive. I believe this language also has the implosive ‘B’ although the ‘B’ with a bar or a hook isnʼt a part of its alphabet.
I specifically spent time trying to learn how to pronounce the ejectives and the implosives and I had conversations with others to try to discover their mystery and I learned how to pronounce both the ejective consonants and the implosive consonants. But, I did not stop there. I further discovered what I consider to be some essential phonetics facts. I discovered that implosive consonants can be voiceless or voiced while the ejective consonants can only be voiceless consonants. Furthermore, I discovered that ejective consonants can be strictive consonants and occlusive consonants while implosive consonants can only be occlusive consonants. Another word for “occlusive consonants” is “obstruent consonants”.
These series of consonants further led me to crack the phenomenon of “phonetic occlusivity” which is also explained in this document and that whole concept is perhaps unique to this document. However, I believe that phonetic occlusivity is an important concept that is not as well defined in other literature outside of this document. However after much research, I can attest to the factuality of its explanations given here.
In this paragraph, I will try to explain to the reader how to pronounce the glottalic consonants. First of all, you have to understand that the glottis is open by default and we do not fully close it during speech or at anytime. The only other times where it is closed that I can think of is coughing, holding the breath and in some languages, the glottal stop. The “glottal stop” is also explained and re-defined in this document and it is also called a “glottal percussive”, that term is unique to this document, but they mean the same thing. The “glottal plosive” is also defined here as a separate sound and articulation. So, you have to understand that in order to pronounce glottalic consonants, you need to close your glottis (hold your breath) and then try to say that consonant like you would normally. If you are reverting to using the pulmonic pronunciation that we normally do, you are doing it wrong. Furthermore, if you try pushing the air out with your tongue, as it is the case in lingual consonants, you are also doing it wrong. You have to use your throat and not your tongue to piston the air out. Just remember, the starting point here is that you are holding your breath.
For ejectives, the larynx has to move upwards while for the implosives, it has to move downwards. So, try to also be able to make that distinction of direction. I can tell you that ejective consonants can not be voiced. That is, we can have ejective sounds such as ‘s, t, k, ch, f, p’ and other sounds that are voiceless but we can not have voiced sounds such as ‘z, d, g, j, v, b’ and so on. This will be a helpful tip for you in identifying the sounds and to judge whether you are able to pronounce them correctly.
Furthermore, these glottalic consonants can not be continuants. This is because unlike pulmonic sounds, there isnʼt a continuous stream of air coming in to articulate the sounds. It has to be pronounced in one go with a piston motion from the throat. That makes it impossible to pronounce these sounds continuously. Thus we can establish the fact that while pulmonic sounds can make the distinction between long and short duration sounds. In glottalic sounds, we only have non-continuant, short sounds.
They are occlusive sounds that are just like plosives except they become a fricative almost instantly after the plosive articulation. You can think of it like a plosive and a fricative being pronounced at the same time. The most common affricates are the first sound in “chair” and its voiced version, the first sound in “jungle”. The IPA lacks specific letters for affricates and instead uses ligatures (two letters connected to each other) comprising of the plosive letter and the fricative letter such as ‘ʧ, ʤ, ʦ, ʣ’ or two separate characters connected with a tie bar, such as ‘ t͡ʃ, d͡ʒ, t͡s, d͡z ’ or ‘t͜ʃ, d͜ʒ, t͜s, d͜z’ to represent them. This practice of using two letters itself is not incorrect. However, I thought that we could have specific letters for affricates, thus I searched for some additional suitable letters from the Unicode and found some letters and assigned them to affricate positions. I had to coin new letters for this purpose in the TPA ‘ ʆ ’ from ‘ ʃ ’ and ‘ʓ’ from ‘ʒ’.
Other Examples for affricates include the Japanese ‘ts’ in words like “tsukuru” or “tsunami”.
In this same scenario however, the plosive and the following fricative may be pronounced successively instead of being pronounced at the same time. In this case you have a consonant cluster, that is, a plosive followed by a fricative instead of an affricate. For it to be an affricate, they have to be pronounced at the same time and at the same place of articulation.
The IPA letters for the voiceless laminal alveolar affricate [ t͡ʃ ] and the voiceless apical alveolar affricate [ t͡s ] share the same plosive consonant letter while they have a separate fricative letter. This is in fact negligent on the part of the IPA. In fact, while the [ t͡s ] sound has the correct letter, the [ t͡ʃ ] does not as in that case, it is still a plosive but its position is slightly above that of the letter [ t ]. However, the IPA does not have a plosive letter for where the [ ʃ ] is located. The TPA, does.
Because they have a fricated release as opposed to a non-fricated release I consider them to be more occluded than the plosives and I believe they are the most occluded of all the manners of articulations, hence they are here at the very top of the list.
{ ꝗ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴜᴠᴜʟᴀʀ ᴀꜰꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛᴇ (U+A757) “latin small letter q with stroke through descender”
{ ǥ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴜᴠᴜʟᴀʀ ᴀꜰꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛᴇ (U+01E5) “latin small letter g with stroke”
{ ꝁ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴠᴇʟᴀʀ ᴀꜰꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛᴇ (U+A741) “latin small letter k with stroke”
{ ꬶ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴠᴇʟᴀʀ ᴀꜰꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛᴇ (U+AB36) “latin small letter script g with crossed-tail”
{ ȼ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴘᴀʟᴀᴛᴀʟ ᴀꜰꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛᴇ (U+023C) “latin small letter c with stroke”
{ ɟ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴘᴀʟᴀᴛᴀʟ ᴀꜰꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛᴇ (U+025F) “latin small letter dotless j with stroke”
{ ɕ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴘᴏꜱᴛᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ᴀꜰꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛᴇ (U+0255) “latin small letter c with curl”
{ ʑ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴘᴏꜱᴛᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ᴀꜰꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛᴇ (U+0291) “latin small letter z with curl”
{ ʆ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ʀᴇᴛʀᴏꜰʟᴇx ᴀꜰꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛᴇ (U+0286) “latin small letter esh with curl”
{ ʓ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ʀᴇᴛʀᴏꜰʟᴇx ᴀꜰꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛᴇ (U+0293) “latin small letter ezh with curl”
{ ꞩ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ᴀꜰꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛᴇ (U+A7A9) “latin small letter s with oblique stroke”
{ ƶ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ᴀꜰꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛᴇ (U+01B6) “latin small letter z with stroke”
{ ⅎ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ʟᴀʙɪᴏᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ᴀꜰꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛᴇ (U+214E) “turned small f”
{ ⱴ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ʟᴀʙɪᴏᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ᴀꜰꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛᴇ (U+2C74) “latin small letter v with curl”
{ ꝑ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ʙɪʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ᴀꜰꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛᴇ (U+A751) “latin small letter p with stroke through descender”
{ ƀ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ʙɪʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ᴀꜰꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛᴇ (U+0180) “latin small letter b with stroke”
They are occlusive sounds whereby a full obstruction is made in the vocal tract and then are released. The obstruction is not brief like in the case with taps. They are full obstructions.
Examples from the Latin alphabet include: ‘P , B , T , D , K , G’
Examples from the Devanagari alphabet include: ‘क , ख , ग , घ , ट , ठ , ड , ढ , त , थ , द , ध , प , फ , ब , भ’
As you can see, there are many more plosive letters in the Devanagari alphabet. This is because it has some additional plosives that are not found in western languages as well as the fact that it has specific letters for aspirated plosives. Such as ‘भ’ which is correctly pronounced as {b͜ha} or ‘घ’ which is {g͜ha}.
{ ƾ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ɢʟᴏᴛᴛᴀʟ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+01BE) “latin letter inverted glottal stop with stroke” ( not in IPA ) ⁽¹⁾
ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ɢʟᴏᴛᴛᴀʟ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ — ʀᴜʟᴇᴅ ɪɴᴠᴀʟɪᴅ
{ ʡ }, { ꞯ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴇᴘɪɢʟᴏᴛᴛᴀʟ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ ( [ʡ] in IPA, [ꞯ] in extIPA, https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%EA%9E%AF ) ⁽²⁾
(U+02A1) “latin letter glottal stop with stroke” / (U+A7AF) “latin letter small capital q”
{ ᵷ }, { 𝼂 } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴇᴘɪɢʟᴏᴛᴛᴀʟ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ ( [ʡ] in IPA, [ꞯ] in extIPA, https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%F0%9D%BC%82 ) ⁽³⁾
(U+1D77) “latin small letter turned g” / (U+1DF02) “latin letter small capital turned g”
{ q } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴜᴠᴜʟᴀʀ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+0071) “latin small letter q”
{ ɢ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴜᴠᴜʟᴀʀ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+0262) “latin letter small capital g”
{ k } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴠᴇʟᴀʀ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+006B) “latin small letter k”
{ g } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴠᴇʟᴀʀ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+0067) “latin small letter g”
{ c } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴘᴀʟᴀᴛᴀʟ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+0063) “latin small letter c”
{ ȷ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴘᴀʟᴀᴛᴀʟ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+0237) “latin small letter dotless j”
{ ȶ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴘᴏꜱᴛᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+0236) “latin small letter t with curl”
{ ȡ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴘᴏꜱᴛᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+0221) “latin small letter d with curl”
{ ƫ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ʀᴇᴛʀᴏꜰʟᴇx ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+01AB) “latin small letter t with palatal hook”
{ ʈ } “latin small letter t with retroflex hook” (U+0288)
{ ᶁ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ʀᴇᴛʀᴏꜰʟᴇx ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+1D81) “latin small letter d with palatal hook”
{ ɖ } “latin small letter d with tail” (U+0256)
{ t } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+0074) “latin small letter t”
{ d } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+0064) “latin small letter d”
{ ᴛ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+1D1B) “latin letter small capital t”
{ ᴅ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+1D05) “latin letter small capital d”
{ ⱦ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ɪɴᴛᴇʀᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+2C66) “latin small letter t with diagonal stroke”
{ đ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ɪɴᴛᴇʀᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+0111) “latin small letter d with stroke”
{ ȹ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ʟᴀʙɪᴏᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+0239) “latin small letter qp digraph”
{ ȸ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ʟᴀʙɪᴏᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+0238) “latin small letter db digraph”
{ p } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ʙɪʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+0070) “latin small letter p”
{ b } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ʙɪʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+0062) “latin small letter b”
⁽¹⁾ This is the same sound as the coughing that people make when they cough.
⁽²⁾ Although the Wikipedia article for the “epiglottal plosive” does not specify phonation, using the IPA diacritics we can easily make it voiceless as [ʡ̥] and voiced as [ʡ̬]. And as for the voiced epiglottal plosive, the IPA does not have a letter for it but the extIPA does. The letter small capital ‘q’ is the only small capital letter that has a display issue with the Windows computer and will not display. Of course, I am aware of this issue and I can not fix it. This is, as of 2022-07-20. I donʼt know why this is the case and I wish it were fixed. But, thatʼs okay because there is already another letter for the epiglottal plosive.
⁽³⁾ Preferably, we want the “latin letter small capital turned g” to represent this sound. However, this letter has only been recently introduced in Unicode version 14, and so fonts do not support it. So, I resort to using the “latin small letter turned g” instead. They both represent the same thing here.
They are just like the plosives, but the main difference is that the glottal opening is closed and then a downward motion is performed. That is, the plosives are pronounced ingressively, with a closed glottis. These can be either voiceless or voiced and they are consonants like {pꜜ, bꜜ, tꜜ, dꜜ, kꜜ, gꜜ}. They were written as [ ƥ, ɓ, ƭ, ɗ, ƙ, ɠ ] in the IPA, but the letters for the voiceless implosives were withdrawn in 1993 (citation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C6%A4). It is easier to pronounce them as voiced and they are more distinct that way. Also, it is easier to pronounce the more frontal plosive sounds in this way, such as {bꜜ, dꜜ}. The reason why implosives are the only category for glottalic ingressives is that they have to be fully occluded. The plosives are the only sounds that match this definition. I investigated whether affricates could be glottalic ingressive and ruled that they canʼt be.
They are not at all popular sounds but reportedly, the Vietnamese language has the easier to pronounce frontal implosives {bꜜ, dꜜ}.
They can be written with the downwards arrow in both the IPA and in the TPA as {pꜜ, bꜜ, tꜜ, dꜜ, kꜜ, gꜜ} or [p↓, b↓, t↓, d↓, k↓, g↓]. I personally think that the modifier arrows {pꜜ, bꜜ} without the tie bar is the most aesthetically appealing way of typing them.
{ qꜜ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴜᴠᴜʟᴀʀ ɪᴍᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ ɢꜜ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴜᴠᴜʟᴀʀ ɪᴍᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ kꜜ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴠᴇʟᴀʀ ɪᴍᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ gꜜ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴠᴇʟᴀʀ ɪᴍᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ cꜜ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴘᴀʟᴀᴛᴀʟ ɪᴍᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ ȷꜜ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴘᴀʟᴀᴛᴀʟ ɪᴍᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ ȶꜜ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴘᴏꜱᴛᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ɪᴍᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ ȡꜜ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴘᴏꜱᴛᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ɪᴍᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ ƫꜜ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ʀᴇᴛʀᴏꜰʟᴇx ɪᴍᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ ᶁꜜ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ʀᴇᴛʀᴏꜰʟᴇx ɪᴍᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ tꜜ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ɪᴍᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ dꜜ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ɪᴍᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ ᴛꜜ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ɪᴍᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ ᴅꜜ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ɪᴍᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ ⱦꜜ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ɪɴᴛᴇʀᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ɪᴍᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ đꜜ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ɪɴᴛᴇʀᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ɪᴍᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ ȹꜜ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ʟᴀʙɪᴏᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ɪᴍᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ ȸꜜ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ʟᴀʙɪᴏᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ɪᴍᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ pꜜ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ʙɪʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ɪᴍᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ bꜜ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ʙɪʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ɪᴍᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
They are very quick flicks that are made with the tip of the tongue. They are also occlusives, but the obstruction is done so much more quickly as opposed to the plosives. For example, the Japanese language [ɾ] sound is correctly supposed to be pronounced this way. It lies halfway between the [d] sound and the [ɹ] sound.
English Examples: Quick pronunciations of the plosives in words like “ladder” or “better”.
Japanese Hiragana Examples: ‘ら, れ, り, ろ, る’ [ɾa, ɾe, ɾi, ɾo, ɾu]
Japanese Katakana Examples: ‘ラ, レ, リ, ロ, ル’ [ɾa, ɾe, ɾi, ɾo, ɾu]
{ ᵳ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ʀᴇᴛʀᴏꜰʟᴇx ᴛᴀᴘ (U+1D73) “latin small letter r with fishhook and middle tilde” ( [ɽ] in IPA )
{ ɾ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ᴛᴀᴘ (U+027E) “latin small letter r with fishhook”
These letters look strikingly similar to the related letters [r]. but there are small differences, as for example, the serif at the top of the letter [ɾ] is not there. It is important not to confuse these letters. There is no other way due to the large number of r-like sounds and there are not enough letters.
They are sounds whereby two articulators are made to strike one another. Examples include the bidental percussive, where the upper teeth and the lower teeth hit each other. And the bilabial percussive, where the lips are made to hit each other. The most common and the easiest of these is the tongue cluck sound that you may already be familiar with; it is done by placing the tongue on the front of the palate sucking in and then letting go, then with that force the tongue strikes the floor of the mouth { ꭅ }, thus “percussives”.
{ ʔ } ɢʟᴏᴛᴛᴀʟ ꜱᴛᴏᴘ / ɢʟᴏᴛᴛᴀʟ ᴘᴇʀᴄᴜꜱꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+0294) “latin letter glottal stop”
{ ꭅ } ʟɪɴɢᴜᴀʟ ᴘᴇʀᴄᴜꜱꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+AB45) “latin small letter stirrup r” ([ǃ¡] in IPA) ⁽¹⁾
{ ʭ } ʙɪᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ᴘᴇʀᴄᴜꜱꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+02AD) “latin letter bidental percussive”
{ ʬ } ʙɪʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ᴘᴇʀᴄᴜꜱꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+02AC) “latin letter bilabial percussive”
I identified three such sounds and further corrected the definition of the “glottal stop” by moving it into this category. The reason for this is that the glottal plosive is the same thing as the coughing sound. But the glottal stop is a separate sound, upon investigation I found that it is a percussive instead and has no pulmonic involvement and I moved it into this category. I also call it the glottal percussive instead of the glottal stop interchangeably.
⁽¹⁾ The IPA uses the exclamation mark [!] for the alveolar click. Then, they use the inverted exclamation mark for the alveolo-lingual percussive. I personally think it is not appropriate to use the exclamation mark to write any click sound. However I believe they resorted to this practice out of necessity. I know that different letters were proposed by different authors for clicks and their use is still somewhat non-standardised. I changed the letter [¡] into {ꭅ} in the TPA because it looked too similar to the vowel letter [i]. But, all the other letters are the same. I also changed the alveolar click letter into something else in the TPA, because the exclamation mark has another purpose in orthography and I donʼt want to use it.
These are consonants whereby a full obstruction is made in the mouth but the sound exits out through the nasal cavity due to the lowering of the velum. They are opposed to “oral” sounds. This is why when people have a congested nose their Mʼs will sound like Bʼs. They are as represented by the Latin letters ‘M’ and ‘N’.
Devanagari Alphabet Examples: ‘ ङ, ञ, ण, न, म ’
Tamil Alphabet Examples: ‘ ங, ஞ, ண, ந, ன, ம ’
IPA Examples: [m, n, ŋ, ɲ, ɳ, ɴ]
{ ɴ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴜᴠᴜʟᴀʀ ɴᴀꜱᴀʟ ᴏʙꜱᴛʀᴜᴇɴᴛ (U+0274) “latin letter small capital n”
{ ŋ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴠᴇʟᴀʀ ɴᴀꜱᴀʟ ᴏʙꜱᴛʀᴜᴇɴᴛ (U+014B) “latin small letter eng”
{ ꞥ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴘᴀʟᴀᴛᴀʟ ɴᴀꜱᴀʟ ᴏʙꜱᴛʀᴜᴇɴᴛ (U+A7A5) “latin small letter n with oblique stroke”
{ ɲ } “latin small letter n with left hook” (U+0272)
{ ȵ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴘᴏꜱᴛᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ɴᴀꜱᴀʟ ᴏʙꜱᴛʀᴜᴇɴᴛ (U+0235) “latin small letter n with curl”
{ ᶇ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ʀᴇᴛʀᴏꜰʟᴇx ɴᴀꜱᴀʟ ᴏʙꜱᴛʀᴜᴇɴᴛ (U+1D87) “latin small letter n with palatal hook”
{ ɳ } “latin small letter n with retroflex hook” (U+0273)
{ n } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ɴᴀꜱᴀʟ ᴏʙꜱᴛʀᴜᴇɴᴛ (U+006E) “latin small letter n”
{ ƞ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ɴᴀꜱᴀʟ ᴏʙꜱᴛʀᴜᴇɴᴛ (U+019E) “latin small letter n with long right leg”
{ ꬼ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ɪɴᴛᴇʀ-ᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ɴᴀꜱᴀʟ ᴏʙꜱᴛʀᴜᴇɴᴛ (U+AB3C) “latin small letter eng with crossed-tail”
{ ɱ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ʟᴀʙɪᴏᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ɴᴀꜱᴀʟ ᴏʙꜱᴛʀᴜᴇɴᴛ (U+0271) “latin small letter m with hook”
{ m } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ʙɪʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ɴᴀꜱᴀʟ ᴏʙꜱᴛʀᴜᴇɴᴛ (U+006D) “latin small letter m”
These are sounds that are pronounced by pushing the air out with the tongue, only sounds pronounced past the body of the tongue can be pronounced this way such as ‘t’, ‘p’ and ‘f’. They have no glottalic or pulmonic involvement. I could only identify three of them. Try pronouncing these sounds now.
{ ŧ } ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀʟ ᴠᴇʟᴀʀɪᴄ (U+0167) “latin small letter t with stroke”
{ ꞙ } ʟᴀʙɪᴏᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ᴠᴇʟᴀʀɪᴄ (U+A799) “latin small letter f with stroke”
{ ᵽ } ʙɪʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ᴠᴇʟᴀʀɪᴄ (U+1D7D) “latin small letter p with stroke”
They are not used in languages.
The clicks are sounds that are pronounced by sucking in with the tongue (lingual ingressives). These sounds are actually used in some southern African languages in speech. There may be some confusion on the pronunciation of the bilabial click, since it seems like it does not involve the tongue. However I have seen an MRI recording and read explanations which say that the tongue is still sucking in on the palate in some way during the pronunciation of the bilabial click. But otherwise the suction may just be done with the lips instead, (bilabial ingressive).
{ ꝙ } ᴜᴠᴜʟᴀʀ ᴄʟɪᴄᴋ (U+A759) “latin small letter q with diagonal stroke”
{ ʞ } ᴠᴇʟᴀʀ ᴄʟɪᴄᴋ (U+029E) “latin small letter turned k”
{ ǂ } ᴘᴀʟᴀᴛᴀʟ ᴄʟɪᴄᴋ (U+01C2) “latin letter alveolar click”
{ ⨎ } ʙɪʟᴀᴛᴇʀᴀʟ ᴘᴀʟᴀᴛᴀʟ ᴄʟɪᴄᴋ (U+2A0E) “integral with double stroke” ⁽¹⁾
{ ʇ } ʀᴇᴛʀᴏꜰʟᴇx ᴄʟɪᴄᴋ (U+0287) “latin small letter turned t”
{ ꭋ } ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ᴄʟɪᴄᴋ, ᴘᴏꜱᴛᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ᴄʟɪᴄᴋ (U+AB4B) “latin small letter script r”
{ ꭌ } ᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ᴄʟɪᴄᴋ (U+AB4C) “latin small letter script r with ring”
{ ꭅ } ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴏ-ʟɪɴɢᴜᴀʟ ᴘᴇʀᴄᴜꜱꜱɪᴠᴇ (U+AB45) “latin small letter stirrup r” ( [ǃ¡] in IPA)
{ ꜭ } ʟɪɴɢᴜᴏʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ᴄʟɪᴄᴋ (U+A72D) “latin small letter cuatrillo”
{ ⱶ } ʟɪɴɢᴜᴏ-ꜱᴜʙʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ᴄʟɪᴄᴋ (U+2C76) “latin small letter half h” ⁽²⁾
{ ᶂ } ʟᴀʙɪᴏᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ᴄʟɪᴄᴋ (U+1D82) “latin small letter f with palatal hook”
{ ʘ } ʙɪʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ᴄʟɪᴄᴋ (U+0298) “latin letter bilabial click”
{ ʘ̊ } ʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ ʙɪʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ᴄʟɪᴄᴋ ⁽³⁾
{ ʘ̊̾ } ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛᴇᴅ ʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ ʙɪʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ᴄʟɪᴄᴋ ⁽³⁾
⁽¹⁾ There are two separate possible clicks located at this position. One is the palatal click that is done exactly at the centre and the roof of the mouth. The other is what I call a “bilateral palatal click” because it also involves the sides of the tongue. This is the click sound that people make to indicate that something is tasty.
⁽²⁾ This particular click sound is not mentioned in any article, but it is easily articulated. It is not used in any speech in any languages but it is possible to pronounce it with the tip of the tongue sucking on the back of the inner lower lip.
⁽³⁾ This is basically the same sound as the kissing sound. Also, it can be “affricated” by squeezing only a little bit of air through the small labial opening backwards. This results in a high pitch, loud noise.
The articulator flaps back and forth very rapidly as the air is blowing through it. It may strike against another articulator in quick succession. Examples include the uvular trill which is the French pronunciation of the letter ‘R’ and the alveolar trill which is the Spanish pronunciation of the letter ‘R’ as in “perro” and the Russian pronunciation of the Cyrillic letter ‘Р’.
{ ʜ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴇᴘɪɢʟᴏᴛᴛᴀʟ ᴛʀɪʟʟ (U+029C) “latin letter small capital h”
{ ʢ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴇᴘɪɢʟᴏᴛᴛᴀʟ ᴛʀɪʟʟ (U+02A2) “latin letter reversed glottal stop with stroke”
{ ꝶ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴜᴠᴜʟᴀʀ ᴛʀɪʟʟ (U+A776) “latin letter small capital rum” ([ʀ̥] in IPA)
{ ʀ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴜᴠᴜʟᴀʀ ᴛʀɪʟʟ (U+0280) “latin letter small capital r”
{ ꭊ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴘᴀʟᴀᴛᴀʟ ᴛʀɪʟʟ (U+AB4A) “latin small letter double r with crossed-tail”
{ ꭉ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴘᴀʟᴀᴛᴀʟ ᴛʀɪʟʟ (U+AB49) “latin small letter r with crossed-tail”
{ ɽ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴘᴏꜱᴛᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ᴛʀɪʟ (U+027D) “latin small letter r with tail”
{ ɼ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴘᴏꜱᴛᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ᴛʀɪʟ (U+027C) “latin small letter r with long leg” ([r̝]/[r̻] voiced alveolar fricative trill in IPA)
{ ɍ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ᴛʀɪʟ (U+024D) “latin small letter r with stroke”
{ r } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ᴛʀɪʟʟ (U+0072) “latin small letter r”
{ ꞗ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ʟɪɴɢᴜᴏʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ᴛʀɪʟʟ (U+A797) “latin small letter b with flourish” ([r̼] in IPA)
{ ꝓ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ʟɪɴɢᴜᴏʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ᴛʀɪʟʟ (U+A753) “latin small letter p with flourish”
{ ƃ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ꜱᴜʙʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ᴛʀɪʟʟ (U+0183) “latin small letter b with topbar”
{ ꝕ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ꜱᴜʙʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ᴛʀɪʟ (U+A755) “latin small letter p with squirrel tail”
{ ꜰ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ʙɪʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ᴛʀɪʟʟ (U+A730) “latin letter small capital f” ([ʙ̥] in IPA)
{ ʙ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ʙɪʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ᴛʀɪʟʟ (U+0299) “latin letter small capital b”
These are non-occlusive sounds whereby a full obstruction is not made in the vocal tract but the air is allowed to be squeezed out of the vocal tract (strictives). They include sounds like ‘s’ as in “seep” and ‘sh’ as in “sheep” and ‘f’ as in “four” and their voiced variants and so on.
{ h } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ɢʟᴏᴛᴛᴀʟ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+0068) “latin small letter h”
[ ɦ ] ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ɢʟᴏᴛᴛᴀʟ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+0266) “latin small letter h with hook” ⁽¹⁾
{ ħ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴇᴘɪɢʟᴏᴛᴛᴀʟ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+0127) “latin small letter h with stroke”
{ ʕ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴇᴘɪɢʟᴏᴛᴛᴀʟ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+0295) “latin letter pharyngeal voiced fricative”
{ χ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴜᴠᴜʟᴀʀ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+03C7) “greek small letter chi”
{ ʁ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴜᴠᴜʟᴀʀ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+0281) “latin letter small capital inverted r”
{ x } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴠᴇʟᴀʀ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+0078) “latin small letter x”
{ ɣ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴠᴇʟᴀʀ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+0263) “latin small letter gamma”
{ ç } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴘᴀʟᴀᴛᴀʟ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+00E7) “latin small letter c with cedilla”
{ ỿ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴘᴀʟᴀᴛᴀʟ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+1EFF) “latin small letter y with loop”
{ ş } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴘᴏꜱᴛᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+015F) “latin small letter s with cedilla”
[ ʃ ] “latin small letter esh” (U+0283)
{ ʒ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴘᴏꜱᴛᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+0292) “latin small letter ezh”
{ ᶊ / ʂ / s } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ʀᴇᴛʀᴏꜰʟᴇx ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+1D8A) “latin small letter s with palatal hook”
{ ᶎ / ʐ / ᶚ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ʀᴇᴛʀᴏꜰʟᴇx ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+1D8E) “latin small letter z with palatal hook”
{ s } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+0073) “latin small letter s”
{ z } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+007A) “latin small letter z”
{ ſ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+017F) “latin small letter long s”
{ ƌ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+018C) “latin small letter d with topbar”
{ θ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ɪɴᴛᴇʀ-ᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+03B8) “greek small letter theta”
{ ð } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ɪɴᴛᴇʀ-ᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+00F0) “latin small letter eth”
{ ƒ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ꜱᴜᴘʀᴀ-ʟᴀʙɪᴏᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+0192) “latin small letter f with hook” ⁽²⁾
{ ꝟ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ꜱᴜᴘʀᴀ-ʟᴀʙɪᴏᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+A75F) “latin small letter v with diagonal stroke” ⁽²⁾
{ f } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ꜱᴜʙ-ʟᴀʙɪᴏᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+0066) “latin small letter f”
{ v } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ꜱᴜʙ-ʟᴀʙɪᴏᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+0076) “latin small letter v”
{ ɸ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ʙɪʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+0278) “latin small letter phi”
{ ꞵ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ʙɪʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ (U+A7B5) “latin small letter beta”
⁽¹⁾ I ruled this IPA letter and its sound as not actually a thing. My reasoning is that it is the very fact that this sound is voiceless is what makes this sound. There is no evidence for it anywhere outside of the IPA, and if it was voiced, it would simply be a vowel sound. It is a pity that this letter is frequently used in phonetic transcriptions. It is invalid.
⁽²⁾ These are just like the ‘f’ and the ‘v’ we are familiar with, but instead of the lower lip touching the upper teeth, it is the upper lip touching the lower teeth.
There are also “whistled sibilants”. They are sounds like [s] and [ʒ] that are “whistled” alongside their normal pronunciations. These are actually found in some African languages such as the Shona language from Mozambique. {s̎} and {ş̎} in the TPA.
These are lingual consonants whereby the tongue blocks the center of the mouth and allows the air to pass through on both the left side and the right side of the mouth. They are called lateral approximants in the IPA, but I favour the term “bilateral approximant”. This is represented by the letter ‘L , l’ in the Latin alphabet. After some research, I concluded that their level of occlusion is about that of the approximants, however with the exception that centrally, there is full occlusion, which is not the case with approximants. They are called “lateral approximants” in the IPA.
[ ʟ̠ ] ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴜᴠᴜʟᴀʀ ʙɪʟᴀᴛᴇʀᴀʟ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (U+029F) “latin letter small capital l” ⁽¹⁾
[ ʟ̠̥ ] ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴜᴠᴜʟᴀʀ ʙɪʟᴀᴛᴇʀᴀʟ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (U+029F) “latin letter small capital l” ⁽¹⁾
[ ʟ ] ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴠᴇʟᴀʀ ʙɪʟᴀᴛᴇʀᴀʟ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (U+029F) “latin letter small capital l” ⁽¹⁾
[ ʟ̥ ] ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴠᴇʟᴀʀ ʙɪʟᴀᴛᴇʀᴀʟ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (U+029F) “latin letter small capital l” ⁽¹⁾
{ λ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴘᴀʟᴀᴛᴀʟ ʙɪʟᴀᴛᴇʀᴀʟ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (U+03BB) “greek small letter lamda”
{ ƛ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴘᴀʟᴀᴛᴀʟ ʙɪʟᴀᴛᴇʀᴀʟ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (U+019B) “latin small letter lambda with stroke”
{ ȴ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴘᴏꜱᴛᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ʙɪʟᴀᴛᴇʀᴀʟ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (U+0234) “latin small letter l with curl”
{ ꬷ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴘᴏꜱᴛᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ʙɪʟᴀᴛᴇʀᴀʟ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (U+AB37) “latin small letter l with inverted lazy s”
{ ᶅ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ʀᴇᴛʀᴏꜰʟᴇx ʙɪʟᴀᴛᴇʀᴀʟ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (U+1D85) “latin small letter l with palatal hook”
{ ꞎ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ʀᴇᴛʀᴏꜰʟᴇx ʙɪʟᴀᴛᴇʀᴀʟ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (U+A78E) “latin small letter l with retroflex hook and belt”
{ l } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ʙɪʟᴀᴛᴇʀᴀʟ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (U+006C) “latin small letter l”
{ ł } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ʙɪʟᴀᴛᴇʀᴀʟ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (U+0142) “latin small letter l with stroke”
{ ʟ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ɪɴᴛᴇʀ-ᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ʙɪʟᴀᴛᴇʀᴀʟ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (U+029F) “latin letter small capital l”
{ ᴌ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ɪɴᴛᴇʀ-ᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ʙɪʟᴀᴛᴇʀᴀʟ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (U+1D0C) “latin letter small capital l with stroke”
{ ɫ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴠᴇʟᴀʀɪꜱᴇᴅ ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ʙɪʟᴀᴛᴇʀᴀʟ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (ᴅᴀʀᴋ ʟ) (U+026B) “latin small letter l with middle tilde”
{ ꬸ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇʟᴇꜱꜱ ᴠᴇʟᴀʀɪꜱᴇᴅ ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ʙɪʟᴀᴛᴇʀᴀʟ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (ᴅᴀʀᴋ ʟ) (U+AB38) “latin small letter l with double middle tilde”
⁽¹⁾ Ruled invalid and unpronounceable as such due to the flexibility of the back side of the tongue.
They are also called “liquids” sometimes in other literature, but I think that term is quite vague.
The ejectives are similar to the implosives in the sense that the glottis is closed during their articulation and have to be. However, unlike the implosives, where they are pronounced with a downward motion of the glottis, the ejectives are pronounced with an upward motion of the glottis. They can only be voiceless consonants. Also, again, unlike the implosives, they can be plosives, affricates, fricatives, bilateral approximants and trills. That is, the occlusive and strictive consonants can be “ejectivised”. They can not be non-strictives, that is, approximants and vowels.
NOT A COMPLETE LIST, (all voiceless):
{ qꜛ } ᴇᴊᴇᴄᴛɪᴠᴇ ᴜᴠᴜʟᴀʀ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ kꜛ } ᴇᴊᴇᴄᴛɪᴠᴇ ᴠᴇʟᴀʀ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ cꜛ } ᴇᴊᴇᴄᴛɪᴠᴇ ᴘᴀʟᴀᴛᴀʟ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ ȶꜛ } ᴇᴊᴇᴄᴛɪᴠᴇ ᴘᴏꜱᴛᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ ƫꜛ } ᴇᴊᴇᴄᴛɪᴠᴇ ʀᴇᴛʀᴏꜰʟᴇx ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ tꜛ } ᴇᴊᴇᴄᴛɪᴠᴇ ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ ⱦꜛ } ᴇᴊᴇᴄᴛɪᴠᴇ ɪɴᴛᴇʀᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ ȹꜛ } ᴇᴊᴇᴄᴛɪᴠᴇ ʟᴀʙɪᴏᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ pꜛ } ᴇᴊᴇᴄᴛɪᴠᴇ ʙɪʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ᴘʟᴏꜱɪᴠᴇ
{ łꜛ } ᴇᴊᴇᴄᴛɪᴠᴇ ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ʙɪʟᴀᴛᴇʀᴀʟ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ
{ ɍꜛ } ᴇᴊᴇᴄᴛɪᴠᴇ ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ᴛʀɪʟʟ
{ ɕꜛ } ᴇᴊᴇᴄᴛɪᴠᴇ ᴘᴏꜱᴛᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ᴀꜰꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛᴇ
{ ʆꜛ } ᴇᴊᴇᴄᴛɪᴠᴇ ʀᴇᴛʀᴏꜰʟᴇx ᴀꜰꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛᴇ
{ ꞩꜛ } ᴇᴊᴇᴄᴛɪᴠᴇ ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ᴀꜰꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛᴇ
{ xꜛ } ᴇᴊᴇᴄᴛɪᴠᴇ ᴠᴇʟᴀʀ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ
{ şꜛ } ᴇᴊᴇᴄᴛɪᴠᴇ ᴘᴏꜱᴛᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ
{ sꜛ } ᴇᴊᴇᴄᴛɪᴠᴇ ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ꜰʀɪᴄᴀᴛɪᴠᴇ
You can think of these sounds as between vocoids and fricatives, they are basically like vocoids but more strictive. For example, in English, the consonant ‘w’ is basically a more constricted version of the sound represented by ‘u’, the constriction is done by rounding the lips a little more than in the case of ‘u’. Furthermore it is important to note that a similar constriction can be done but without making the lips rounded. This is the case as it is in the Japanese language. We typically write “watashi wa”, but here, unlike in the English ‘w’, the lips are not made rounded. Think about it, why would it be since it is easier not to do so, that is an added step. Thus, we need to make a distinction between ‘v’, ‘u’, ‘w’ and the unrounded ‘w’ which I assigned the letter ‘ɯ’. It looks like two of the ‘u’ letters instead of the two ‘v’ letters. I think it is an appropriate letter. And yes, this letter is the unrounded close back vowel in the IPA, but I thought that it looked bad as a vowel and that it looked inappropriate and I believe that it is more fitting here. I then went and took the (ᴕ) (U+1D15) letter from the Uralic Phonetic Alphabet to fill in its place. Also, I want to comment here that in the English language, the letter ‘w’ is incorrectly being called a “double u” when in fact it is a “double v” and it is called a “double v” in all other languages as well. It is only in English that it is being called by this incorrect name. The “double u” is in fact another letter as it is mentioned here, the letter ‘ɯ’ which has the Unicode U+026F.
-
Approximants are unique in the way that they are the gray area between the contoids and vocoids. A language may treat an approximant as a vowel or as a consonant phonologically. Although, phonetically they are considered as contoids by default in the TPA.
-
For this reason, approximants can also be a part of diphthongs. I call them “constricted diphthongs” compared with “diphthongs”. In which case, they may either be at the start of the diphthong or at the end of it.
{ ʖ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴜᴠᴜʟᴀʀ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (U+0296) “latin letter inverted glottal stop” ( [ʁ̞] in IPA )
{ ɰ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴠᴇʟᴀʀ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (U+0270) “latin small letter turned m with long leg”
{ y } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴘᴀʟᴀᴛᴀʟ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (U+0079) “latin small letter y” ( [j] in IPA )
{ ɥ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ ᴘᴀʟᴀᴛᴀʟ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (U+0265) “latin small letter turned h”
{ ɻ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ʀᴇᴛʀᴏꜰʟᴇx ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (U+027B) “latin small letter turned r with hook”
{ ɹ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴀʟᴠᴇᴏʟᴀʀ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (U+0279) “latin small letter turned r”
{ ɯ } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ᴜɴʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ ʙɪʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (U+026F) “latin small letter turned m” ( [ β̞ ] in IPA )
{ w } ᴠᴏɪᴄᴇᴅ ʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ ʙɪʟᴀʙɪᴀʟ ᴀᴘᴘʀᴏxɪᴍᴀɴᴛ (U+0077) “latin small letter w”
Vocoids are basically the point at which a constriction is no longer made in the vocal tract and the sound simply exits out of the vocal tract (non-strictives). These vocoids are very complex as there are many different factors that affect them. The position of the jaw, whether the jaw is lowered or not. How low down the jaw is lowered. The position of the tongue. The rounding of the lips. The direction of the airflow. It is possible to lower the velum in order to cause the air to exit out of the nasal cavity, these are called nasal or nasalised vowels and this phenomenon is called nasalisation. This phenomenon is observed in multiple languages such as in the French language. English does not have vowel nasalisation. It is also possible to make an epiglottal restriction during the pronunciation of vowels such as it is observed in the Arabic language. This is however a harder pronunciation to employ than vowel nasalisation but there is plenty of evidence that this is possible and I have seen Arabic speakers being able to do this although I am not able to do it myself as of this writing.
For me, the explanation of the vocoids and coming up with a vowel chart was really difficult. I had to find a balance between the position of the jaw and the position of the tongue. However, I am satisfied with where I have brought the work to. I am happy that the TPA has less vowel letters than the IPA. Mine is at about twenty vowels while theirs is at least thirty. I think that is too many vowels. I also object to how there are at least seven or so levels for vowel laxity while mine has a total of five levels. I cut the last two laxity levels that were there in the IPA with the logic that the jaw is not lowered down that much in order to pronounce vowels. Although, anatomically, the jaw can technically be lowered down further to those two levels, that just isn’t a thing for speech.
-
Extra Tense Vocoids, Approximants (IPA semi-vowels): These are basically so restricted that we classify them as consonants, they are one level more lax than fricatives and two levels more lax than plosives. They form the base level for all the other vowels and are measured from here correctly.
-
Tense Vocoids (IPA close vowels): The jaw is either not lowered down or lowered slightly during the articulation of these vowels. This also limits the positioning of the tongue, another word for tense vowels is close vowels as it is used in the IPA.
-
Near-Tense Vocoids (IPA near-close vowels): The jaw is lowered down slightly, a little more than that of tense vocoids. Another word for near-tense vowels is near-close vowels as it is used in the IPA.
-
Lax Vocoids (IPA mid vowels): The jaw is plentily lowered down during the pronunciation of these vocoids. The tongue has more space to roam, as a result, the tongue has more possible positions for placement. These are around where the IPA calls mid level vowels or near open vowels.
-
Extra-Lax Vocoids (IPA open vowels): The jaw is lowered down very much, perhaps about as half as much as it could possible be lowered. It is possible to lower the jaw further anatomically. These are around where the IPA calls open vowels.
REAR VOCOIDS CENTER VOCOIDS FRONT VOCOIDS ɰ w y ɥ ᴕ u ɪ ʉ ə ʊ ᵻ ᵿ a o æ œ e ø ᴀ ɔ ᴁ ɶ ɛ ꬿ
{ ɰ } ᴜɴʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ʀᴇᴀʀ, ᴇxᴛʀᴀ-ᴛᴇɴꜱᴇ ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+0270) “latin small letter turned m with long leg”
{ w } ʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ʀᴇᴀʀ, ᴇxᴛʀᴀ-ᴛᴇɴꜱᴇ ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+0077) “latin small letter w”
{ y } ᴜɴʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ꜰʀᴏɴᴛ, ᴇxᴛʀᴀ-ᴛᴇɴꜱᴇ ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+0079) “latin small letter y”
{ ɥ } ʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ꜰʀᴏɴᴛ, ᴇxᴛʀᴀ-ᴛᴇɴꜱᴇ ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+0265) “latin small letter turned h”
{ ᴕ } ᴜɴʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ʀᴇᴀʀ, ᴛᴇɴꜱᴇ ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+1D15) “latin letter small capital ou”
{ u } ʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ʀᴇᴀʀ, ᴛᴇɴꜱᴇ ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+0075) “latin small letter u”
{ ɪ } ᴜɴʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ꜰʀᴏɴᴛ, ᴛᴇɴꜱᴇ ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+0069) “latin small letter i”
{ ʉ } ʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ꜰʀᴏɴᴛ, ᴛᴇɴꜱᴇ ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+0289) “latin small letter u bar”
{ ə } ᴜɴʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ʀᴇᴀʀ, ɴᴇᴀʀ-ᴛᴇɴꜱᴇ ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+0259) “latin small letter schwa”
{ ʊ } ʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ʀᴇᴀʀ, ɴᴇᴀʀ-ᴛᴇɴꜱᴇ ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+028A) “latin small letter upsilon”
{ ᵻ } ᴜɴʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ꜰʀᴏɴᴛ, ɴᴇᴀʀ-ᴛᴇɴꜱᴇ ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+1D7B) “latin small capital letter i with stroke”
{ ᵿ } ʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ꜰʀᴏɴᴛ, ɴᴇᴀʀ-ᴛᴇɴꜱᴇ ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+1D7F) “latin small letter upsilon with stroke”
{ a } ᴜɴʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ʀᴇᴀʀ, ʟᴀx ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+0061) “latin small letter a”
{ o } ʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ʀᴇᴀʀ, ʟᴀx ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+006F) “latin small letter o”
{ æ } ᴜɴʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ᴄᴇɴᴛʀᴇ, ʟᴀx ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+00E6) “latin small letter ae”
{ œ } ʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ᴄᴇɴᴛʀᴇ, ʟᴀx ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+0153) “latin small ligature oe”
{ e } ᴜɴʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ꜰʀᴏɴᴛ, ʟᴀx ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+0065) “latin small letter e”
{ ø } ʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ꜰʀᴏɴᴛ, ʟᴀx ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+00F8) “latin small letter o with stroke”
{ ᴀ } ᴜɴʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ʀᴇᴀʀ, ᴇxᴛʀᴀ-ʟᴀx ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+1D00) “latin letter small capital a”
{ ɔ } ʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ʀᴇᴀʀ, ᴇxᴛʀᴀ-ʟᴀx ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+0254) “latin small letter open o”
{ ᴁ } ᴜɴʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ᴄᴇɴᴛʀᴇ, ᴇxᴛʀᴀ-ʟᴀx ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+1D01) “latin letter small capital ae”
{ ɶ } ʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ᴄᴇɴᴛʀᴇ, ᴇxᴛʀᴀ-ʟᴀx ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+0276) “latin letter small capital oe”
{ ɛ } ᴜɴʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ꜰʀᴏɴᴛ, ᴇxᴛʀᴀ-ʟᴀx ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+025B) “latin small letter open e”
{ ꬿ } ʀᴏᴜɴᴅᴇᴅ, ꜰʀᴏɴᴛ, ᴇxᴛʀᴀ-ʟᴀx ᴠᴏᴄᴏɪᴅ (U+AB3F) “latin small letter open o with stroke”
So, what is the difference between [i] and [e] or [u] and [o] ?
In [e] , the jaw is lowered more than in [i] which basically means a larger cavity of opening in the mouth as the air exits out. I have established four levels of vowel laxity while basing them as a continuation of the approximants and the other contoids. These vocoids are in full conformity with the contoids with regards to their positions and they should not be measured separately. I call them tense vocoids, near-tense vocoids, lax vocoids and extra-lax vocoids. However, there isnʼt a big difference between the two tense vocoids and the two lax vocoids other than the fact that articulatorily, orthographically and phonetically, they are a thing.
I will try to prove in what way there really are four levels to vowel laxity plus the approximant base level. In languages, we have a phenomenon called “stress”, it plays an important role in phonology and syllables. For example, in multi-syllable words, the stress will be on a specific syllable. That syllable will have its vowel pronounced in a more open (lax) way in many languages. For example, this is the case in English although I donʼt think such a pronunciation is employed in the French language. Where also, in French, I believe all the vowels are pronounced in a little bit more tense manner than in English. Compare these two English words: “bit” and “empty”. “bit” is one syllable and since in English, at least one syllable in any word has to be stressed, this vowel is stressed and is pronounced like a near-tense vocoid. While in “empty”, the first letter is stressed, so the last vowel is pronounced as a tense vocoid (not as lax as in “bit”). This is very much a real thing in English, however the distinction itself is not phonological.
French: “bitte” [j] Turkish: “bit” [i] English: “bit” [ɪ] English: “bet” [e] English: “egg” [ɛ]
Regarding the topic of a phonological distinction between near-tense / tense and lax / extra lax: I do not believe that languages make a phonological distinction between them and I have not seen proof of that in my research. They do make orthographical and phonetic distinctions in different languages for various reasons but I do not believe that they ever make a phonological distinction. That is, if we were to substitute [e] for [ɛ], we would get a separate word or that speakers of a given language would be able to distinguish them apart. They just sound too alike for such a distinction to be made. I do know that sometimes such explanations are made, considering [e] and [ɛ] to be separate vowels in languages, but I believe it’s not the case. I know that languages may make an orthographical distinction sometimes which my 5 level vowel laxity system still fully accounts for, but that does not prove a phonological distinction.
I will try to demonstrate this further by giving examples from graphology. Let us observe the following Greek letters:
Omicron: Ο/ο (and) Omega: Ω/ω
So then, it would be up to me, to explain what the difference between these two letters are. We already know that Greek language speakers do not make any kind of a pronunciation distinction when reading or pronouncing these letters and neither do I, and neither do I advocate for it. They simply read it as [o]. But then, why are there two separate vowels here? If we were to say that Omega represents the [ɔ], we wouldn’t at all be incorrect. Our universal vowel system still holds up. Or alternatively, someone could say that the Omega represented a long duration [oː] and that distinction has since been lost. That would also be valid and that is also already accounted for in our vowel system.
Another example is from Devanagari: ओ / औ
Notice that the second “o” vowel has another stroke on it. That just makes it a little bit more open. Giving us [ɔ].
With this explanation, I justify why there must be at least four levels to vowels with there also existing a level zero. That is, the approximants. Further of note, four levels are necessary to accommodate the orthographical markings of some alphabets and spellings as demonstrated above. It is also a necessary factor when we are dealing with phonetic stress. Here, again, I have to highly criticise the IPA for its 7 level vowel laxity as well as its 33 vowels. In comparison I have 5 levels and 20 vowels and I believe itʼs extremely accurate and itʼs not superfluous.
As if the jaw and vowel laxity wasnʼt a difficult matter to explain, the role of the tongue further complicates the definition of the vowels. The tongue can be placed either in the center part of the mouth (the default position) or advanced further or retracted backwards. We call these front vowels, central vowels and back vowels. Furthermore, in tense vocoids I erased out the central vowel category simply because there wasnʼt enough room in the mouth to make a three level distinction and I went with the two level distinction instead. For lax vocoids however, because the jaw is lowered, it is possible to make a more profound distinction between the vowels [a] and [e] which gives us the vowel [æ]. This is basically a sound between [a] and [e] and it exists in English as well as in Arabic. Arabic in fact does not make a distinction between [a] or [e] but only has [æ].
Thus we have about twenty vowels plus four semi-vowels (approximants) which is the gray area between vocoids and contoids. This is actually a much simpler and factual explanation of vocoids as compared with that of the International Phonetic Alphabet. There, they have over thirty vowels and many of them are extra and unnecessary. Seeing how difficult it was for me to establish my twenty plus four vowel system, I can see why they got it wrong. I even believe their vowel chart is upside down.
It is also important to understand that approximants can also act as vowels. For example, the French language pronunciation of the vowel [i] can be correctly described as [j]. That is, the tongue is slightly higher when this vowel is pronounced than in English. way works as they are the gray area between vowels and consonants.
Please find the vowel chart of the International Phonetic Alphabet here for comparison:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vowel
I believe I have to define what I mean here by “phonetic occlusivity”. Basically, “occlusive” is a sound where a full obstruction is made in the vocal tract. Another word for it is “obstruent”. The vocal tract is fully closed even if briefly. While in “strictive”, a restriction is made that is not a full occlusion and in non-strictive, a restriction is not made (for example, the vowel sounds). But still, the mouth, the jaw, the tongue, the lips and so on may still be moved. Thus, we have three levels of occlusivity and we need to have it as such in order to explain the sounds accurately. We can have occlusive, strictive and non-strictive sounds for the pulmonics while we can only have occlusive and strictive sounds for ejectives and we can only have occlusive sounds for implosives.
Again, this is factual information that is perhaps not there in other literature, but it is true. I implore you to test it for yourself. I have made an attempt at making a graph where I try to show all these sounds in a LibreOffice Calc spreadsheet. You can find it here: https://github.com/SalviaSage/Translingual-Phonetic-Alphabet/releases
Lingual does not have anything to do with the glottis. Thus the voicing element is also completely left out of its operation. It works by pistoning the air outwards with the tongue (egressive), or by sucking in with the tongue (ingressive). This suction motion is known as clicks, while the egressive motion of pistoning the air out is known as velarics. So again, some terminology, egressive glottalics are commonly called “ejectives” while ingressive glottalics are called “implosives”. egressive linguals are called “velarics” while ingressive linguals are called “clicks”.
Pulmonic egressives can be voiceless or voiced (voicing means the vibration of the vocal cords) while glottalic egressives (ejectives) can only be voiceless. Pulmonic Ingressives (implosives) on the other hand can be either voiceless or voiced.
In the the linguals and percussives, the voicing element is completely left out of the operation. This is because the linguals are pronounced in the mouth with the tongue and so, they completely bypass the throat and have nothing to do with the throat. This is also true for the percussives. In the glottal percussive or the glottal stop, which is also referred to as a glottal percussive in this document; the vocal cords are brought together to make a full closure.
Citation of the Wikipedia article for the glottal stop: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glottal_stop
I do not agree with the following statement that we can find on this webpage: “The airstream mechanism is pulmonic, which means it is articulated by pushing air solely with the lungs and diaphragm, as in most sounds.”
I am making the argument that this sound is not pulmonic and that it is percussive. There isnʼt any kind of a push of air from the lungs in order to cause this motion for this particular articulation. Such a thing is possible, however this gives us the coughing sound which is a different sound than the glottal stop and technically, it is a “glottal plosive”. Thus I call what other literature calls “glottal stop” a “glottal percussive”. It is when both the vocal cords are brought together and made to hit one another briefly, then let go. This motion can also be “held” at that spot, which is what happens when a person holds their breath. This glottal stop must not be confused with a “glottal plosive” which is basically the coughing sound. I believe it is important to make the distinction between a “glottal percussive” and a “glottal plosive” (a cough) as they are not the same thing mechanically.
Therefore, I define the “cough” as a “(voiceless) glottal plosive” (its voiced variant can not exist for the same reason ejectives can not be voiced) and the “snort” as a “nasalised ingressive uvular trill”. That is, the air comes inwards from the nose and trills the uvula. The “sniff” as “ingressive nasal fricative” and “blowing your nose” as “egressive nasal fricative”. Yes, it may seem weird and not necessary to define these, but proper explanations must be set in place.
During the pronunciation of sounds, it is possible to make additional articulations at the same time. This is referred to as “secondary articulation”. For example; How would we explain the pronunciation of the word “build”? There is a ‘b’ consonant followed by a ‘u’ vowel and the ‘i’ vowel followed by two consonants. However, if you pronounce this word, you will quickly see that the ‘b’ here is not a simple ‘b’. In fact, while it is being pronounced, the tongue is being raised upwards towards the palate. This secondary articulation is taking place at the same time as the ‘b’ is being pronounced at the lips. So you see, different parts of the vocal tract can be used at the same time. And in this case, it is being used as such. However, a person who does not know articulatory phonetics may be oblivious to it. The fact of the matter is, in English, we only see the phenomenon of palatalised consonants, that is, consonants that are pronounced with the tongue raised up towards the palate before the vowel sound [u]. The same phenomenon exists in Russian but more extensively. In Russian spelling, there are even specific letters to mark palatalisation. The palatalised consonants are quite widespread in Russian.
There are other secondary articulations, such as labialisation. That is, the lips are rounded during the articulation of a consonant. Nasalization, that is, the velum is lowered down to make the air pass out through the nasal cavity as opposed to the oral cavity. Pharyngealization, whereby a restriction is made around where the epiglottis is, such as in Arabic. Velarisation or lingual retraction, whereby the tongue is retracted backwards during the pronunciation of a consonant. For example, in English, this is how the letter ‘L’ is pronounced. While it is being pronounced, the tongue is being retracted backwards while I donʼt know of any other language where the ‘L’ is pronounced in this way.
Thus, I call phones that have a secondary articulation “complex” phones as opposed to “simple” or “plain” phones. This distinction must be made in phonetics because different parts of the vocal tract can be utilised at the same time. Sometimes, these kinds of pronunciations will make a different word, that is, a language may make a phonological distinction between simple phones and complex phones.
There are a wide range of secondary articulations. A consonant may be pronounced with more of a puff of air, such as in the case of aspiration. In the Devanagari alphabet, there are specific separate letters for the aspirated consonants as opposed to non aspirated ones. Some fricative consonants can even be whistled such as it is in the Shona language in Africa, written as {s̎} and {ş̎} in the TPA with the whistling combining diacritic. Vowels may be pronounced with a different tone such as is the case in Vietnamese, Thai, Mandarin and Cantonese languages. These tones are written with combining diacritics with vowels in Pinyin, which is a way to write the Chinese languages in the Latin alphabet.
In order to mark such phenomena, I came up with the idea of using combining diacritics in the TPA. There are many different combining diacritics in the Translingual Phonetic Alphabet. These combining diacritics go on top of the existing letters to mark secondary articulations. During the design of the TPA, I tried to reserve marking “phonetic” phenomena by placing the combining above diacritics on top of the letters while I reserved the combining below diacritics for “phonological” phenomena. The IPA on the other hand, does not make that distinction. The IPA also resorts to using superscript complimentary letters. We also use superscript complimentary letters in the TPA, however, there are also combining above diacritics for representation.
The idea here is that since these two sounds are being articulated at the same time, they metrically constitute one sound. Thus we must have a single letter. The use of combining diacritics allows us to still keep one base letter. Further of note, if a computer were to count the number of sounds in a word, solely based on its letter count, the number of represented sounds would not be higher than the actual number. Thus, my alphabet is superior to the IPA in that regard. It really does follow the rule of one letter per sound and respects computational linguistics. One design feature of the TPA was that it could be used in computational linguistics projects as well as being typed by hand and I believe my alphabet excels in both of those areas as well as its visual appeal. More details of this can be found in my other work “A Guide on Making Phonetic Transcriptions and the Translingual Phonetic Alphabet”
Tones are something that we come across in music. You may be familiar with the musical scale do-re-mi-fa-so-la-si-do. This is an eight level scale, in which we have eight tones. The same concept is found in phonetics and pronunciation, especially with regards to the pronunciation of vowels. Here, we call it pitch and we have three fundamental levels called high, mid and low. In the International Phonetic Alphabet, there are five levels called extra-high, high, mid, low and extra-low. In the Translingual Phonetic alphabet however, there are three levels. I personally do not believe languages or their speakers distinguish between high and extra high or low and extra low. That, to me, seems like it would be too tedious. This is similar to the case with vowel laxity where the IPA has seven levels and I have five levels in my explanations. This actually makes things easier without compromising anything. There are also what are called “contour tones”. In this case, the tones start from one tone and go towards another tone. There are also triple contour tones, where again, it is the same thing but with three tones instead. This gives us three flat level tones, six double contour tones and ten triple contour tones.
The full list is as follows:
| FLAT TONES | DOUBLE CONTOUR TONES | TRIPLE CONTOUR TONES |
|---|---|---|
| LOW | LOW - MID | LOW - MID - LOW |
| MID | LOW - HIGH | LOW - HIGH- LOW |
| HIGH | MID - LOW | LOW - HIGH - MID |
| MID - HIGH | MID - LOW - MID | |
| HIGH - LOW | MID - LOW - HIGH | |
| HIGH - MID | MID - HIGH - LOW | |
| MID - HIGH - MID | ||
| HIGH - LOW - MID | ||
| HIGH - LOW - HIGH | ||
| HIGH - MID - HIGH |
You can also think of them as diphthongs, but instead, it isn’t the positions of the lips, the jaw or the tongue that move, but it is the pitch that moves. I believe that phenomenon itself happens at the vocal cords and it is not controlled elsewhere. Unfortunately, I can not give you a precise explanation as to what happens there in this document as that is something I do not know, but I believe that concept is already explained in the study of music and it is probably something similar to that. I do believe however that I have correctly identified the three tones that are utilised in speech as such. I personally believe that this scale fits in with all languages and that we do not need a higher level of acuity other than these three levels. This concept is particularly important in far east Asian languages such as Thai, Vietnamese, Mandarin and Cantonese.
This concept itself is not really there in what we call non-tonal languages such as English and European languages. Pitch itself of course, is still used in a more minor way in those languages. However, it plays a very crucial role in tonal languages such as Thai, Vietnamese, Mandarin and Cantonese. Here, they convey meaning and these languages can not even be spoken properly without the correct use of these tones. If you speak a non-tonal language, just as it is the case with the pronunciation of ejective consonants, which is discussed in this document, you would not know how to pronounce it properly and would have to try to learn and master how to use pitch when you speak.
In this paragraph I will try to teach you the reader how to do so. We have already defined three levels of pitch. So, the first step is to correctly identify the higher pitch and the lower pitch. Then, we have to try to learn how to move the pitch from these various positions as discussed above. I think actively trying to learn a tonal language may be the best way to master the use of pitch. So, I would actually advise you to try to learn Vietnamese, Mandarin or Thai and to try and pronounce its words correctly.
In the case of intonation, it is a kind of a “global pitch”. For example, a whole sentence can rise in pitch when asking a question.
Further of note, a system of pitch consisting of 5 levels instead of 3 as it is already defined in the IPA, shown by the markers ˥, ˦, ˧, ˨, ˩. This itself isnʼt incorrect. While I define high, mid and low, they define extra-high, high, mid, low, extra-low. Itʼs the same system except it is more detailed. It can also be a seven system although I canʼt find graphical markers for marking that, but still it can be marked by the use of superscript numbers next to words and letters such as ¹ ² ³ ⁴ ⁵ ⁶ ⁷. So, basically we can pick a set of tones, either 3, 5 or 7 and I think it would suffice for all needs.
It is easy to understand the diphthongs or the “gliding vowels”. Basically, These are vowels that start from one vowel and move towards another vowel. They constitute one vowel sound. There is also a phenomenon called “hiatus” whereby we have two separate vowels with a syllable break in between. It is important to be accurate with our explanations with regards to this subject. Diphthongs are vowel sounds whereby one vowel sound shifts towards another one in pronunciation while in triphthongs, the same is true but then it moves towards a third vowel.
For example, check out this Turkish word < saat >, {sa‧a̱t} which means “hour”. We do not have a diphthong here, we have two monophthongs. This phenomenon is called “hiatus” and the vowels can be separate as well such as again in Turkish < şair >, { şaː‧ɪ̱ɹ } where we have two syllables｡
While in the English word “out” {aʊt} we have just one syllable and we have a diphthong. For example, letʼs look at the Wiktionary.org article for the pronunciation of the word “eight” /eɪt/: I would instead transcribe it as {eyt}. Here, we have a diphthong. The {e} slides towards the {y} and ends at {y}, the palatal approximant sound. It is starting at the position where the jaw is lowest and quickly, the jaw rises up during its pronunciation.
So, you see, the gliding vowels can glide from any starting point in any direction without issues. IPA fails to acknowledge that the gliding can go up to [j], they stop it short within the vowel range. Thus, they transcribe “gate” and “gait” the same, without the palatal approximant. However, I transcribe “gate” as {ɡeyt} and “gait” as {ɡeɪt}.
Similar to how vowels can come next to next as it is the case in diphthongs, consonants can also come next to next without a vowel in between. This is called consonant clusters. Most languages do not have words that are only made up of consonants but some Slavic languages have such words. For example, this is a Wikipedia article of the Czech language sentence made up of words containing only consonants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Str%C4%8D_prst_skrz_krk .
Ejective consonants can also be in clusters. It is true that ejective consonants can only be short consonants but that doesnʼt prevent them from being pronounced in succession.
Sometimes there will be phonological rules in languages which prevent clusters at certain positions in words. Some of them are more liberal when it comes to this, for example in Slavic languages where they tend to be consonant heavy and consonant clusters up to 3 consonants can be found at the start, middle or at the end of word or the entire word can be made up of consonants. In the case of Turkish for example, we can have “double consonant clusters” at the end of words but not at the start of words. So, for example the word “train” is pronounced with a vowel inserted between the “t” and the “r” even if it isnʼt spelled that way in writing. This is sometimes demonstrated in literature as CVCC or CCCVCCC. For example, the English word “strengths” is CCCVCCC.
In this chapter I want to criticise the International Phonetic Alphabet and the Wikipedia articles freely and extensively.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Phonetic_Alphabet#Vowels
I want to talk about my belief that the vowel chart of the International Phonetic Alphabet is not metrically accurate.
Early on in the development of the Translingual Phonetic Alphabet, I suspected that the vowel chart of the IPA was grossly wrong. I later learned that this vowel chart is based on the vowel chart that was determined by Daniel Jones and that the IPA uses Jones’ vowels. I also believe that it was negligent on their part and that they did not measure the accuracy of Jones’ vowels and hastily included them in the IPA. I consulted the work “Natural Phonetics and Tonetics” by the Italian phonetician Luciano Canepari to get his views on the vowel chart. He too had come up with a different system than the IPA. I also thought his system was being unnecessarily accurate and that it had even more vowels than the IPA. But, I understood that he was only trying to be accurate. Dissatisfied with both of their charts, I then devised a chart of my own. According to my chart and my explanations, the vowel chart of the IPA on Wikipedia.org is upside down. There, the trapezoid becomes narrower as the vowels become more close. It is supposed to be the other way around because as the vowels become more open, there is more room for the tongue to make a distinction between front, mid and rear vowels.
Here, we can see that a trapezoid that becomes closer as it becomes more open. And one has to ask the question, why is the vowel chart of this shape? The Italian phonetician Luciano Canepari also thought that that shape was wrong and came up with a shape of his own. His shape is a parallelogram and not a trapezoid. I do believe that the trapezoid is a better shape, however it is supposed to become wider as the vowels become more open. This is because as the jaw is lowered down there is more room for the tongue to move around and a better distinction between vowels can be made. Thus I call the vowel chart of the IPA upside down.
In my chart, I do not make a distinction of central vowels between the rear and front vowels for close vowels. So it goes directly from front vowel to back vowel. While it does make a distinction between front, central and rear for lax vowels. This is because this is already demonstrated in languages, not only phonetically but also phonologically. English is one language that has all three for example, as “but, bat, bet”. But, I found no such evidence for the close vowels. Also, yes I moved the central vowel schwa to the rear vowel position, but at the same time, it is more frontal than that of the rear back close vowel like the Turkish dotless i.
It was incredibly difficult for me to come up with a factual system and it took me months and many revisions, but eventually I believe I came up with a system that is more accurate than that of the IPA’s. For example, how can the Latin alphabet letter ‘a’ be classified as a front vowel? Also, the letter ‘æ’ is being considered as a frontal vowel there, where even, it glyphically looks like it is between an ‘a’ and ‘e’. This letter was used in Old English spelling and it represented a central lax vowel there.
I, correctly, and metrically measured the human mouth and the positions of the tongue and determined that the vowels must be measured starting from the four established approximants also known as semi-vowels. This gives us an excellent measuring point from where we can measure the rest of the vowels. My alphabet, for tense vowels, only has front and rear vowels as I believe that making a central distinction here is not necessary and is not done in world languages. Instead, here, a frontal (palatal) and a rear (velar) distinction, combined with the position of the jaw is extensive enough. However, for the open vowels, because the jaw is lower down, we have more room for the tongue and languages plentily use this trait of the vocal tract. In my other literary work, I explained that the vowel letter “aesc” from Old English is a central vowel and that it is not a front vowel as it is shown in the IPA chart. This also makes sense since this letter is clearly a combination of the letters ‘a’ and ‘e’ and its sound lies right between the frontal ‘e’ and the rear ‘a’.
There are also vowels there in the IPA that do not have labially rounded counterparts. This also makes no sense, as, if they can be unrounded, they can be rounded as well. In my alphabet, there are ten vowel sets. Each one has a labially rounded counterpart which gives us a total of twenty vowels. The approximants also have their rounded counterparts. I believe one thing that makes my vowels excellent is the fact that they are being measured from the approximants, and relate to those other consonants really well. The vowel chart is in fact not at all a separate chart, but fits in very well with the other consonant sounds and their measurements.
Another thing which makes me convinced that my vowel chart is really accurate is its capacity in not excluding any orthographic vowel representations found in any language, alphabet and writing system. I believe I also talked about this in my other literary work “A Guide on Making Phonetic Transcriptions and the Translingual Phonetic Alphabet”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiced_glottal_fricative This just doesn’t exist… It’s voiceless variant does because it is simply an exhalation of breath. But if it were to be voiced, then it just becomes a vowel instead.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiced_velar_lateral_approximant This consonant the Wikipedia article talks about is actually impossible to articulate. The dorsa of the tongue is not like the tip of the tongue and it is just not flexible enough to make this articulation at that place of articulation. I concluded that the most anterior part where this articulation is possible is at the palate and not more than that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lateral_click Here it writes:
"English does not have a lateral click (or any click consonant, for that matter) as a phoneme, but an unreleased lateral click does occur as an interjection, usually written tchick! or tchek! (and often reduplicated tchick-tchick!), used to urge a horse to move. A form of click can also be heard by some English speakers when scoffing, but this is generally a dental click rather than a lateral click."
The click that people make when scoffing is indeed a dental click. However the click that people make when they urge a horse to move is a velar click. I believe they are simply calling the velar click a lateral click in this article because they believe that it is pronounced with one side of the mouth. That itself may be true but it doesn’t have to be pronounced with one side of the mouth and I believe it is more accurately described as a velar click as that is the place of articulation where it is being pronounced.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ejective_consonant Here it writes:
"In phonetics, ejective consonants are usually voiceless consonants that are pronounced with a glottalic egressive airstream."
They are right about the second part. The ejective consonants are pronounced with a glottalic egressive airstream. However I disagree with the first part where it says “usually”. I am convinced that they are always voiceless and that there are no voiced ejective consonants and that that is impossible.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lateral_consonant#List_of_laterals Here it lists:
Voiced dental lateral approximant [l̪] Voiced alveolar lateral approximant [l] Voiced retroflex lateral approximant [ɭ] Voiced palatal lateral approximant [ʎ] Voiced velar lateral approximant [ʟ] Voiced uvular lateral approximant [ʟ̠]
Here, the article claims that velar and uvular lateral approximants are possible while I claim that bilateral approximants (lateral approximants) can not be pronounced at those places of articulations because the tongue is just not flexible enough. I already ruled that the furthest back point for bilateral approximants is at the palatal position. Therefore, the last two entries are just invalid. We know that in bilateral approximants the tip or the body of the tongue blocks the central part of the mouth while the air passes on the right and the left sides, hence “bilateral approximants”. The further back part of the tongue (the dorsa) just doesnʼt have the flexibility to pronounce consonants in this way.
Also, this list has left out the “interdental lateral approximant” for which the IPA already has a character as listed below.
Voiced interdental approximant [ l̪͆ ] Voiced dental lateral approximant [l̪] Voiced alveolar lateral approximant [l] Voiced retroflex lateral approximant [ ɭ ] Voiced palatal lateral approximant [ʎ]
Voiced velar lateral approximant [ʟ]Voiced uvular lateral approximant [ʟ̠]
This is already mentionened in this document but the IPA does not make this important distinction. The glottal stop, as you know and as it is defined by the IPA is correct. However, they do not talk about the “glottal plosive”. This is probably because it is not a speech sound but instead it is the coughing sound. But regardless, that is what it is. Since the word “stop” is being used synonymously with the word “plosive”, I also call the glottal stop a “glottal percussive”. I believe that is more factual with regards to what it is and it is listed as such in the TPA. For this reason I also prefer the word plosive compared with the “stop”.
In literature, you will see the word “velarisation”. What it’s talking about is actually lingual retraction towards the velum. The same is true for “palatalization“, towards the palate and “uvularization”, towards the uvula. These motions in fact do not involve any kind of an active movement with the palate, the velum or the uvula. It only has to do with the tongue. There is also the word “nasalisation” which does have everything to do with the velum. In nasalisation, the velum is lowered down, allowing the air to exit out from the nasal cavity. And in, “oralisation”, the velum moves up and blocks the nasal cavity, so the air and the sound exit out of the oral cavity.
We know that whispering is a real thing. So what happens when somebody whispers? Basically, the vocal cords are not vibrated (are turned off). The consonants and the vowels that would normally be voiced are not voiced. While in normal speech, it is a mix of voiceless and voiced sounds.
So for example; this pronunciation; {ɔ̱l᷾ h͜yu̱mən bɪ̱ɪŋs a̱ɻ bo̱ɻn fɻɪ̱ː æ̱n ɪ̱ːkuəl᷾ ɪn dɪ̱ɡnɪtɪ æ̱n ɻa̱yts｡}
would effectively become: {ɔ̱̥l̥᷾ h͜yu̥̱m̥ə̥n̥ b̥ɪ̥ɪ̥ŋ̥s ḁ̱ɻ̥ b̥o̥̱ɻ̥n̥ fɻ̥ɪ̥ː æ̥̱n̥ ɪ̥ːku̥ə̥l̥᷾ ɪ̥n̥ d̥ɪ̥ɡ̥n̥ɪ̥tɪ̥ æ̥̱n̥ ɻ̥ḁ̱y̥ts｡}
I used the devoicing combining diacritic on everything that is normally voiced. Here, we can also see multiple combining diacritics going below the letters, while we can also have combining diacritics go on top of the letters. A good demonstration of the combining diacritic system of the TPA.
What happens when someone lisps?
Basically, they are unable to correctly articulate the sound {s}, which is a common sound in many languages. Instead, they pronounce a voiceless dental fricative {ſ} or a voiceless interdental fricative {θ}. Those sounds are articulated further down at the upper teeth and between the teeth, while the {s} sound is articulated further up on the alveolar ridge. In the case of lisping, the speaker simply misses the mark while trying to hit an {s} and gets a {ſ} or a {θ} instead, possibly due to some personal defect. This is a fault as some languages do not even have the {θ} or the {ſ} sound and just have the {s}. However, in some other languages, this is an intentional feature of the language, and a language may have both {θ} and {s} separately as it is the case in English. In this scenario, it is an intentional feature. A famous example of lisping is the Castilian Spanish language from Spain (Castellano). For example, pronouncing “Barcelona” as [barθelona].
It is common for children to miss the mark with regards to certain sounds. I myself can recall that I had difficulty pronouncing the sound esh [ ʃ ] and would pronounce an es [s] instead, which was noticed by the adults. Another common one is the pronunciation of the ‘r’ sound as a ‘y’ sound in children. Usually, over time, these faults would be resolved by themselves without outside intervention. But in some cases they do continue on into adulthood as I did meet an adult who still pronounced the ‘r’ as a ‘y’ because he wasn’t able to do it right.
Also, other examples I can give is the fact that all occurrences of the Arabic language [θ] in words of Arabic origin exist as [s] in the Turkish language, such as “hadith” as “hadis” and its voiced variant [ð] exists as [z]. Another example is German speakers pronouncing the English [θ] as [s] as well. Filipino language speakers pronouncing the [f] as a [p]. Japanese speakers pronouncing the ‘l’ as an ‘r’. Arabic speakers pronounce the [p] as a [b] and so on and so forth. In these scenarios, the reason for this is the fact that those sounds do not exist in the persons native language and thus they are not familiar with those sounds and do not know how to articulate them properly. Because of that, they then use sounds that are close to those sounds which gives rise to “accents” and minute differences in speech.
I strongly believe we need a translingual approach to articulatory phonetics as this subject has nothing to do with a specific language, dialect or an accent. Instead, it only has to do with human anatomy and what it’s capable of doing. The various explanations with regards to the different pronunciations found in different languages would have to be based on a correct understanding of the human anatomy and of articulatory phonetics. Thus, accurate explanations of the phonology of world languages can not be made without an accurate understanding of articulatory phonetics. I myself first studied the phonology of world languages before having learned about phonetics. I realised that I needed to have a better understanding of phonetics before I could deal with correct phonology, then I shifted my attention towards phonetics.
Eventually, I came up with a phonetic alphabet and a phonetic notation system that does not take accents into account at all and yet is incredibly accurate with regards to correct pronunciations of world languages.
In this paragraph, I want to try to prove my point. If I pronounce some Arabic words by substituting an epiglottal fricative {ħ} instead of a glottal fricative {h}, immediately I sound more “Arabic”. If I substitute an {æ} where an {a} or an {e} would be, again I sound more Arabic. If I substitute a {q} where a {k} would be, again I sound more Arabic. This in fact has nothing to do with my native language. It just so happens that the Arabic language has and utilises those sounds. Similarly, when saying Russian words, if I pronounce the alveolar approximant {ɹ} as an alveolar trill {r}, I sound more “Russian”. If I pronounce my vowels a little more tense in French, I sound more “French”. If I pronounce my alveolar plosives as retroflex plosives by curling the tip of my tongue towards the palate, I sound like someone from India and so and and so forth. It is only the slight variations in pronunciations that give rise to these accents. For example, in “Southern American English”, you may have heard of this accent, all of the vowels are pronounced in a more central manner. This is not really something that can be marked in phonetics and neither should it be. How can you mark every little small difference? And so, you need just one system that works everywhere and I strongly believe I created that system.
In order to be able to spell out words as they are pronounced accurately, we need to have a phonetic alphabet. We know for a fact that no language is written phonetically. Although for some of them, their spellings are more phonetic than others. For example, modern Turkish writing is quite phonetic. Perhaps because its alphabet and spelling was constructed specifically for it in the twentieth century. While English, for example, has been using the Latin alphabet for about a millennium. Needless to say, English is not written very phonetically with words such as “knight” being spelled the way they are. But if you go back in time far enough, there really was a ‘k’ sound at the beginning of that word. If we make such a scale, we can perhaps put English and Russian spelling around the same area which make blatant disregard for how the words are actually pronounced, while we put Turkish and Spanish at the top of the list which is quite phonetic in their writing systems. Chinese Hanzi writing would be at the other end of the scale because its writing system does not hint anything as for the pronunciation of the words but simply state their meanings instead. A phonetic alphabet is basically the other extreme end of the scale. Thus, as a linguistic tool, a phonetic alphabet tries to fill in that gap. If you are good enough, you can create an alphabet which, since it is based on the anatomy of the human vocal tract and its mechanisms, could spell out any utterance regardless of language. This is what the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) tries to do and it is the best example of such an attempt. It is a good alphabet, but clearly it was not good enough for me, because I went out of my way to create a phonetic alphabet of my own.
Here, I will not be getting into how to use this alphabet because I believe that requires a document by itself which I have already uploaded as well. However, I do want to talk about the reasons as to why I created the alphabet and how.
Obviously, in order to create a phonetic alphabet, you need to have an excellent understanding of articulatory phonetics. Trying to make a phonetic alphabet which would accommodate all world languages is an extreme challenge. Then, I had to take into fact that such an alphabet already exists, the International Phonetic Alphabet. Albeit I considered it not good enough. My alphabet is based on the International Phonetic Alphabet and of course it has changes in areas where my explanations regarding phonetic articulations differ. That alphabet itself is based on the explanations as they are given here, but most of that is the same as the explanations given in the International Phonetic Alphabet. I can say that it took me months to develop this alphabet and although its consonant system was not very difficult to set, its vowel system was difficult to develop.
I am personally convinced that my alphabet is superior to the IPA in multiple ways. I discuss in which ways and how to use this alphabet in detail on the literary work titled “A Guide on Making Phonetic Transcriptions and the Translingual Phonetic Alphabet”. That work is the next step in learning how to use this alphabet in order to make accurate phonetic transcriptions and to advance the practice of phonetics. There may be explanations there that are not in this document, but I aim to make those explanations conform with one another.
In this closing chapter, I want to talk freely and give commentary on this work.
Firstly, thank you for reading my document. Well, perhaps you haven’t read every part of it. I believe it is my best scientific literary work that I have written and I consider it to be my greatest literary work. It is the biggest work I have written and I host this work and other works online, freely, at a web address that is dedicated to myself. I want to say that I did not write this document for any kind of personal gain. At most, I could accept donations for it. I want to be honoured and credited for my works. However, I do not want to bar anyone from using or copying the information included here. It would honour me that my findings and writings are taught, shared and acknowledged.
You could make the argument: Well, why bother with it? Why bother making such explanations when it is already explained. Why bother creating a phonetic alphabet when one already exists. I can make the counter-argument: Would it be better if they had not created the “Gregorian Calendar” and had not made the switch to it? There already was a “Julian Calendar” and it did count the days. Well, that switch was made to be more accurate with regards to the facts and it was good on their behalf to make such a change. So, I did the research and I did the work and I believe I advanced this scientific subject by myself and I am proud.
Copyright [2022-20**] [SalviaSage]
Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
You may obtain a copy of the License at
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
limitations under the License.